Why Women Have A Sixth Sense

Women don’t literally have a sixth sense, but they do have better intuition than men, if casual observation is to be believed. (Readers may correct me if I’m off-base, but I think there have even been studies purporting to show that women do have a more finely developed intuition than men, or that women lean on their intuition more than men lean on theirs.)

If we take it as a given that women are more intuitive, then we can offer two plausible evolutionarily modulated reasons why this sex difference exists.

1. Women need to be better than men at screening out undesirable mate prospects, and intuition is a tool they use to accomplish on-the-fly screening.

Men are more visual-oriented than women, so men can see with a split second glance which women are worthy of their seed and which aren’t. Women, on the contrary, require many input variables to determine a man’s worthiness as a mating partner, including, in great measure, his personality; so women have evolved a preference for intuition — molded by eons of accumulated genetic wisdom — as a guide to help them filter out beta males from alpha males. (Or lesser value men from higher value men.) This intuition is what allows a woman to uncover, through the mechanisms of gut feelings and subconsciously formulated sly psychological “tests”, a man’s strength, character, attractiveness to other women, and ability to take the heat without melting down. Her hamster gets a tingle for the man who passes through her intuition filter, and she responds by physiologically opening up to him.

2. Women need to be better than men at averting and resolving relationship trouble, and intuition is a tool they use to identify early warning signs that the relationship is foundering.

A woman is honed like a machine to be a first responder to relationship crisis. She uses her intuition to pick out subtle nicks in the relationship armor that could grow to chasms if left untended. Women’s attractiveness window for landing a desirable mate is shorter than men’s attractiveness window, so a woman who has invested some months or even years into a relationship will have more to lose than the man should the relationship fail. A man can more easily pick himself up and brush himself off for another go-round in the dating scene. Women therefore have evolved an exquisite sense for sniffing out warning signs that a man is losing interest, or that his love, and hence his commitment, is cooling. This is why men are perplexed when women bring up “problems” with the relationship that the men can’t fathom are worthy of discussion. And yet, women’s refined intuition for evidence of men’s emotional distancing has likely served their sex well over the millennia, helping her head off additional investment that would lead nowhere but to an older and unlovelier version of herself alone again in the mating market.

Men who have experience with a lot of women have acquired an astute awareness of women’s intuition, and have even developed their own to compete with women. Players have a preternatural ability to know when a girlfriend is drifting away, or a lover is about to cheat, or a date isn’t both feet in. They know better than less experienced men when to cut their losses and when to press on, partly based on their own refined intuitions and partly based on a better ability to manipulate women’s intuitive sense for both of their gains. This is why some of the best players beloved by women possess feminine acumen themselves. The alpha male leader of men who cares not for the emotional world of women often leaves the sensitive female cold, and finds himself playing second fiddle to the man who has absorbed female psychology and made it work for him.

man’s intuition: if she butthexes i ain’t ever gonna marry her.
woman’s intuition: i can buttehxt all i want, and when i am ready (around 35), he will man up as william bennet taught him to and mary me.

so went tyo da ministerz at my church and i a siad, ” i am tyring to strat a GREAT BOOKS FOR MEN club for all teh youngz menz so they can get in otutch with tehir rightrulful heritage. can i please have some funding fiat dollarz for this noble exalted proejetcz?”

and the pleaseant nice minister shook his head and said sorry they are short of udnd short of fundingz as they just launched the “sitserhood of sore buttholes in search of beta providerzs to marry” bible study gourp group and they needed all teh funding to go to the mall for makeoverz to get rid of da 35 year old wrinkles so as the damn betas just weren’t manning up and marrying demz, and dey extra cash to get sitterz for all der bastard kidz zlzzllzlzlzolozlzlzlzozlzoz

3. Women have to be more adept at navigating the flatland of the female gatherer world. Men have clearly defined hierarchies based upon fairly obvious and measurable skills; Leadership, the most ephemeral of these skills, still tends to follow from mastery and strength. Women, on the other hand, live in a world of political intrigue. A woman who reaches above her station – who ‘steals’ the alpha male from his woman – is liable to receive severe retribution from the rest of the women in the tribe.

It’s not so much male nuances that a woman’s worried about, it’s female nuances. Men are pretty clear about our standards; it’s easy to stay on our goodsides, and hunting isn’t zero-sum. The more worthy men there are, the bigger the mammoth we can take down. Women, on the other hand, do live in a zero-sum world. Fierce but hidden competition, and mutual contempt. Murder will be done furtively, but it’s on the table in every woman-on-woman interaction.

“Men are pretty clear about our standards; it’s easy to stay on our goodsides, and hunting isn’t zero-sum. The more worthy men there are, the bigger the mammoth we can take down. Women, on the other hand, do live in a zero-sum world. Fierce but hidden competition, and mutual contempt”

Had an acquaintance tell me today my gf of 6 months ( fucked for 4 months, dating for 6, she’s 20 yrs old) in high school was a huuge sloot and once there were rumours floating she had an std.

Bitch is a 9, won’t let me meet her best guy friend because he’s a druggy hipster and “you wouldn’t like him”, hasn’t yet gone on the pill after telling her numerous times to do so (I’m now going to give the ultimatum of no fucking until she makes the appt) and.. yes, has a new job as a bartender at the Keg, which is like being a stripper without the bouncer & poles…she’s also a bartender at a bar I bounce at.

Why do you care? You’re fucking her. Sluts are for fucking.
End of fucking story.
Keep fucking those holes until you’re tired and fuck her good to keep her interested, and when/if you find a worthier girl, come back here for LTR game advice.

Sex is all good – I don’t waste time dating girls – their either fbs or LTRs – this has now entered LTR stage, and with this news, sure, I always knew she was a filthy cum drain, like a call her in bed, but this just brings it all outta the sewers and into the streets.

I care because I’m in a LTR with this bish and my goals have changed. She’s a good girl, but sluts make bad wives/ravenous hypergamy, and who knows the time when that comes to fruition on my ass

So what exactly is intuition? I am afraid (again) I regard it as illusory. How many times have I heard some woman announcing how things are bound to be and getting it completely wrong. It may be desirable for women to screen out in the manner you suggest, but my observation of them is that they are simply terrible at getting anything approaching a decent or correct judgement; a bit like certain software which simply screens out everything. (I am with orange and they were even screening out Orange as Spam – I ask you).

I am afraid just because an idea has come into their pretty little heads does not make it true no matter how much they may wish it.

You’re confusing intuition with the ability to carry out a task to completion, an inimically male trait. Women’s intuition serves them by assisting them in figuring out how to get a man to carry out a task, heh.

Women are notorious for reading too much into vocal tone and facial expressions… and have a VERY selective memory about the past… up to and including their “impression” of things that never even went down.

What all the above amounts to is that the cues which they are adapted to screen for are, in this age, mostly maladaptive, in that it filters out hordes of serviceable providers in favor of the “assholes”, of whom they are famously “tired”, but who exhibit attractive chimp-like traits.

These are short-term predictions based on impressions arising from her ancestral history, not calculations. It works for that female macaque, but seldom the female human in 2012. It’s all about display, not tabulation of pros & cons.

+1 here. It’s hard for me to see women as more “intutitive” when they are the least rational of the species. In fact, i think women are downright delusional, especially in America. Delusional about their place in the SMV, delusional about the conduct and actions of the alpha that is stringing them along, delusional about what it takes to make a living and raise a family, and delusional about what drives their attraction.

I will give you that women can sense it slipping away, but I think men are far more intutitive by nature. Mostly because they had to be, sense they play the role of hunter, gatherer and protector.

Intuition/gut feeling is thought without thought, arrived at by the experience of cues or signals in your environment being processed by a part of your brain that does all that shit for you so you can get on with your day. It’s both learned and instinctual.

Through spending most of their lives thinking and talking about people women begin to marry up what they sense around them with what they’ve experienced so that next time they meet a guy smiling too much they know he’s not suitable material, even though there is no rationalizing about his body language projecting an air of supplication bla bla bla they know he’s just not quite right. Something like that anyway.

Mostly. There’s a segment, maybe 25% if am generous, that does not fit that general category. Some of it is borderline.

Take for instance Stacey Dash. She got off the plantation recently and deviated from the general leftist paradigm and got called all sort of nasty from libtards. OTOH, check her marital record. Typical “modern” wench in the entertainment industry. Granted, many 35 years old would look like her mothers while she is 47, and thus her genetics afford her to be extremely picky, but apparently irrationally picky. Her last hubby of 2 years is under a restraining order. Long live bad boys!

I suppose that the occurrence of non-standard types (standard as defined by you and i general adequate and true) is a form of adaptation, a rather steep bell curve that may represent some survival value.

Other than that, female intuition is useless. Women are notoriously inept at identifying vital things like which dominant male is most likely to murder them.

On the other hand, nature may have selected for women who prefer dominant males who may kill them. Women were acquired through trade or captured and treated like property during most of human evolution. The women who recoiled at cruel, dominant males were probably raped and killed. The women who welcomed cruel, dominant males with open vaginas were enjoyed and kept around a little longer… long enough to pass on to their offspring the preference for cruelty.

Anon, no, intelligent women have better things to do than to gossip about other women or even differentiating males, even though they are not on estrus in the way non-humans are. They don’t have the time. Perhaps your argument can explain why there is so much domestic violence against women, in that the calibre of men who perpetrate it are likely to be those who were good at fooling women and thus were selected by them to reproduce, but I still think you are over-simplifying it. Evolution is a bastard, isn’t it?

That is, if there’s a couple and only one partner is being the abusive asshole, chances are it’s the chick. Seriously.

And don’t forget the attempts by the feminazi lobby to distort the definition of what constitutes IPV [intimate partner violence], practically to the point of meaninglessness (much like raaayyype). It’s basically a continuation of The Narrative that men=bad and women=good, and whatever she *feels* to be the case must automatically be right, no matter the evidence.

Note: appeals to ‘truth’ and ‘logic’ are forms of abuse. No, I’m not making that up either.

Of course, these rules only apply to beta-herbs who provide everything except gina-tingles. As has been so devastatingly pointed out at the Chateau, a woman will often have a hard time leaving a genuinely abusive lover but will ditch a sincerely nice guy in a heartbeat, even if (especially if?) he’s been a faithful husband and doting father, usually because she’s ‘bored’, ‘unsatisfied’ or simply ‘unhaaapy’ in some non-specific way.

Of course, I’m not advising anyone to go out and just choke a bitch, just to understand what you’re dealing with, and that while it often may look pretty good, it ain’t often pretty.

It’s not just about sex and romantic relationships. Women also have less physical strength to defend themselves and they need the cooperation of others while they are pregnant and raising children. They damn well better be better socially than men.

Neuroscience can comment about this. Anthropologically, women evolved to be the more empathic emotional participants in the family unit. This is evinced neurologically by the fact that they have three times the activity men do in the “emotional centers” of the brain, e.g. the ventral tegmental area, caudate nucleus, limbic system, and others. These areas of the brain not only contribute to their emotions, but to the perceptiveness and “intuition” of said emotion, intent, etc., in others.

I suspect that “women’s intuition” is simultaneously from the same neurological mechanism as the hamster and also the lone internal countervailing force women have against it.

Like a blind man who has developed more refined auditory processing to help him compensate, women’s diminished powers of reason in comparison to men are partly balanced by a stronger irrational instinct.

It’s a blunt tool to be sure, causing plenty of false positives, but because it errs on the side of survival, the phenotype has been retained.

Men of course also have intuitive power — the gut feeling — but also posses a far more advanced higher reasoning suite that recognizes the gut can be wrong, and that it is limited by being purely reactionary — it’ll help you, but it doesn’t explain anything.

Young men typically have to be taught to “go with your gut,” in situations of quick-decision making when information is low or unobtainable, whereas young women don’t require instruction in using intuition.

Outside of child welfare, women’s intuition is most often manifest in the “creeper” vibe they detect in desperate, unworthy men because while unfamiliar men are the number one environmental threat to both sexes, women have far less defenses against them.

This Hamster-Intuition Feminine Heuristic Suite probably also explains why women have an easier time navigating by remembered landmarks rather than using the abstract geospacial mapping that men readily do.

“Outside of child welfare, women’s intuition is most often manifest in the “creeper” vibe they detect in desperate, unworthy men because while unfamiliar men are the number one environmental threat to both sexes, women have far less defenses against them.”

Right on about the “creepy vibe” — a friend and I call this the “stranger at the gate” effect — but this is where female intuition and reality part ways: not all men are equal, so not all men are “the number one environmental threat to both sexes”. I call it a case of runaway selection. The judgment is over-applied due to a narcissism bubble among “liberated” wimminz.

Outside of child welfare, women’s intuition is most often manifest in the “creeper” vibe they detect in desperate, unworthy men because while unfamiliar men are the number one environmental threat to both sexes, women have far less defenses against them.

The instinct goes like this: “Creeper” => obviously doesn’t know how to act around women => obviously has no experience with women => women won’t let him be with them => obviously has a spergish (or worse) character flaw

When I think of creep…look at a picture of photographer Terry Richardson. He obviously doesn’t have any more game to get supermodels other than he is in a position of power, but he is definitely a creep.

This Hamster-Intuition Feminine Heuristic Suite probably also explains why women have an easier time navigating by remembered landmarks rather than using the abstract geospacial mapping that men readily do.

Correct. Women have 2-D minds, but strain to reach the 3-D. The unrestrained materialism of women represents 2-D creatures striving for the treasures of the 3-D world.

Men have 3-D minds and try reach for the 4-D. Men ponder philosophy. The stars. Infinity. Woman ponders her new pair of Prada spiked heel shoes. Both feel victorious in their conquests.

O.k. Jack, well have a go with this argument. if women can detect desperate losers, then explain why there is a significant amount of women having affairs. Didn’t I read some joke on here about it, which was in the vein of who are the married men having affairs with? Aren’t these “unfamiliar” men?

Have a look at the married cheaters sites like AM for the profiles of the guys and how women like me can sniff them out into categories and how I can also sniff out the fake profiles designed to entice either sex.

It’s the same thing. Some cheating women are still going to be able to aim for men who are in the same league and so are not desperate, but are just serial philanderers stuck in adolescent “notches on bed-post” phase. They are most welcome to have these over-sexed cake eaters who are probably overdosed on testosterone, manic or both. Most of these women if they go ahead, are going to be stuck with desperate losers and realise their affair partners might be a different dick for a while, but they become boring too.

Female intuition is nothing more than reading your body language and listening to the tone of your voice. Remember you speak more with your body or how your words sound than you do with just the words. Women can read that better than most men. But the man that has an idea of it will have better chances of reading her better.

The face, eyes, posture, hands, legs will tell more about what she (or you) is truly feeling than the words.

It is deliberately contrived bullshit that allows women to fantasize of intellectual equality. “You can have all those Nobel prizes, but … but … I have emotional intelligence!” The tragedy is the West fell for this myth 50-100 years ago. We, their sons and grandsons, have been paying the price since.

I’m mostly on your side here, but you’re using a false dichotomy. It’s not either-or.

Liberal arts intelligence, problem-solving intelligence, creative intelligence, and –yes — emotional intelligence are not mutually exclusive. They all have different uses. In fact, I wouldn’t have gotten as far in my career as I have if it WEREN’T for emotional intelligence, even though ostensibly I’m paid for liberal-arts and problem-solving intelligence.

So don’t whack society at the knees to conform to your own biases. We humans do have get along with one another, and unless you’re on the autistic spectrum, you’ve got to take other people’s characters, predilections, emotional states, etc. into account in order to accomplish anything.

I’d also point out that one of the three major legs of rhetoric (which you mentioned above as manly) is pathos, i.e. emotional appeals.

Women are not better than men at “emotional appeals.” They are more emotionally incontinent. Different things.

Generally speaking (NAWALT DISCLAIMER), men are superior in every variation of the i-word you can come up with, including emotional intelligence. Equalizers snatch at that term and redefine it in such a way that makes it hard to argue with: emotional intelligence means being better in touch with your feeeeeelings. This is a subjective standard! And it must be, because by any objective measure men dominate intellectually. As proof I offer the superiority of men in every single field of intellectual and creative endeavors.

But if “intelligence” were to be anything more objective than some feminist’s projection of her frustration at being inferior, men would score higher in that too. Men are more observant and have a greater capacity for excellence and discipline — even controlling for the factor of disuse: women may detect, say, microexpressions better because her social worth depends largely on gauging signals correctly, whereas men either purposely don’t give a shit or are strong enough to dismiss covert communications as beneath them (i.e., womanly).

Tell me, who would make the better lie-detector, the average professionally trained man or the average professionally trained woman? Men have the intelligence to better apply that professional training. Whatever “emotionally observant” qualities a woman might have naturally, the man’s applied intellect will easily soar past a woman’s ceiling, even with regard to emotional subjects.

In short, women simply suck at everything more than men. It’s a bitter pill for some to swallow, but as a man, you should simply accept this certitude and move on with your life. Stop looking for ways women can be our equals to satisfy some vestigial ideology learned back in elementary school. “Rosie The Riveter!” and stuff.

Any elite thinker, doer, creator, or sayer who is a woman is also an extreme outlier. Even at the trivial end of the spectrum men dominate. If you think women can be superior bitches, you have never met a homosexual; i.e., in every field men choose to participate, men naturally dominate. If we had wombs, we would have engineered them by now to pop out ten babies a day just to show up Jack in accounting.

“whereas men either purposely don’t give a shit or are strong enough to dismiss covert communications as beneath them (i.e., womanly).”

Apparently you’ve never worked in an office.

Men NEED to identify microexpressions in the modern workplace. We ignore them at our peril. I’ve learned to identify them, and it’s fueled my current success.

The man who is aspieishly dedicated to intellectual accomplishment ends up becoming a technical expert of some sort, and that’s great. But the man who HIRES the technical expert is the one who reads microexpressions, body language, and plays political games. (Disclaimer: This is more common in some industries and less common in others.)

I am irritated by the nonverbal, indirect, womanly communication style too, but do you get my point? This has nothing to do with equality or Rosie the Riveter or whatever angry muck you want to fling around. It’s just pragmatic. We get further, professionally, by becoming emotionally aware of other people — whether we like it or not, that’s how much of modern life works. And that’s in addition to mastering everything you named in your first comment.

King, stop trying to convince this loser. He doesn’t even reply properly to your assertions.
The goal of any leader is not to convince the die-hard opponents, but to make sure that only street dogs follow them.

Your stand-alone posts are enough. Arguing with dim-witted contrarians doesn’t add much, and even tends to dilute the initial message.

I recently moved in with my aunt who is letting my stay with her for free until I get shipped off to boot camp in a month.

I got kicked out of my fathers house who I stayed with for 7 years.

My problem is that I have not been living with women like this for a while (My aunt and her 31 year old daughter with a 2 year old) and I don’t know if with this new knowledge of game and alpha if it would be appropriate to wash dish’s and clean up after my cousins baby because the baby makes a mess in the living room where I sleep on the couch.

I carry grocery’s because they think since I’m a guy I should but when it comes to washing dish’s and cleaning they should do that write? Something just dose not seem write.

Should I just suck it up and wash dish’s or could I game them to do them themselves?

I really didn’t believe in gender roles but when I moved in this house they were almost forced on me.. Help?

Also I want to display alpha the best I can but since I have not lived with women since I was 11(curently 20) when my mother died, I’m not used to how I would act in accordance to them, now more so since I have knowledge over game and alpha, It feels like if I become the aloof uncaring asshole I could be kicked out but at the same time I don’t want to supplicate, don’t get me wrong I will help if they need help but I learned that being nice people tend to take advantage of my niceness and EXPECT it everytime… FUCK THAT, can you maybe shoot some articles my way( Database is huge ) or could you send me some personal advice. Help appreciated.

You’re there a month. Don’t worry about it, just do some damn dishes and clean up after yourself. It’s truly trivial compared to the shit you’re going to deal with in boot. In fact, it’ll help prepare you.

She didn’t bring you in to the situation to be the man of the house or to provide protection, she’s letting you live there for free for a short stint out of familial obligation. Deal with it for a few weeks. Repair some shit if you have the time and inclination.

Alpha is primarily concerned with behavior toward women you want to seduce, not women you’re related to. She’s your surrogate mother in this situation, and is helping you out, therefore you should reciprocate in some minimal way.

You’ll have plenty of opportunities to exercise your alpha mojo trying to keep your girlfriend off the carousel when you’re deployed for 10 months at a time.

Game them up the wall and back down until they are fetching your slippers. There is never a reason in female relations not to always game.

You think they want you to carry groceries and take out the trash and fix the drip on the faucet? No, they want the psychic assurance of a man under the same roof, and these requests are the tests to see if indeed a real man is there with them in their unprotected domicile, which is otherwise open to their fantasies of the rapacious, roving Mongol horde.

So, while you can be the man of the house in fact, if you are not also the man of the house in attitude, you will be Miguel, the docile super, who obediently says sí to their every frivolous request. More important than the deed is the attitude. When you act like you own the place, they will eventually start serving you like Marthas and Marys.

Of course, you can’t establish a regime change overnight, or else you will raise their hackles. But dream big, kid. A month is plenty of time. They are privileged to be graced by a manly presence in their humble little abode. You dignify it. And if you don’t start acting that way, even if you quietly perform the tasks appropriate to your role, they will smell an impostor, and begin to despise you like the beta bitchboy you appear to be.

But be careful, because after you have established your status as dominus, they will each try to fuck you. Especially after you come out of boot camp, when your posture, appearance, and résumé will match your inner frame.

Then again, after you become a United States Marine, much of the behavior you tolerated in your former life will baffle you, and you will instinctively know not to take a subordinate position in any unmanned civilian home. Semper Fi.

And I’m not trying to be sexual in anyway but it wouldn’t hurt if they saw me as a stud. Don’t get me wrong I’v displayed I was pretty alpha but not so much to the point where they are fetching my slippers, any suggestions?

There is no not being sexual. We are sexual beings. “Male and female he created them.” Sexual means pertaining to the the sexual difference. It is at its most raw in the reproductive act — what the term sexual has come to mean — but that’s not what I’m talking about either. Identity as a man or a woman pervades every part of our being — we cannot refer to a person without a gendered pronoun. We make it a point to wear clothing appropriate to our sex so that no one can possibly mistake us for the opposite.

So, you don’t have to do much to make it clear you are a man. They can literally sniff that in your sweat. But you have to own la differénce inside, until it flows effortlessly to the outside. With a light touch. You don’t hit them over the head with a club and drag them by the hair (at least not in the beginning). Overt displays are not necessary, and may backfire, depending on the omega/beta frame you are emerging from. You tease, neg, mock, pose, stare, relax, scratch your nuts, leave the toilet seats up. All those many spontaneous actions that comprise the art of game. Unless you were feminized by an unusual childhood, it is mostly going on instinct — I am the biggest, strongest entity in this place, and I will move about as such, I will speak as such, I will command as such.

I don’t have good specifics, that’s not my forte. The PUA 101 guys are much better at suggesting tricks and exercises to get your frame right — although, they are focused on the pick-up, not the more quotidian angle of techniques and habits. But the PUA method is more of an outside-in, fake-it-till-you-make-it approach that I don’t have much experience with. Ever since I was 16, and my first serious girlfriend asked me to choke her, I got with the dark program from the inside out. After that, it was all reacting to facts on the ground from an attitude of I own you and everything I survey.

When I try thinking what will work on a domestic front with live-in relatives, I have to imagine myself in that situation. To react appropriately requires a level of detail you couldn’t provide about the subliminal cues radiating all over the place. What are the aunt and cousin’s psychological profiles? Are they bitter, easygoing, content, manic, outgoing, reserved, cuntly, chipper? Contrary to the PUA advice, I have found that a talent for empathy (non-sociopath narcissist) is crucial: once I can see the world through their eyes, I know what they yearn for and exactly how to manipulate them. But that takes experience or training or insight that may be hard to come by without a mentor and role model.

All the more reason to use this brief pre-boot window of opportunity as a trial-and-error period. Just start throwing stuff against the wall and see what sticks. Be observant, hone your instincts against theirs. Speak bluntly. Start working on your boot frame right now — that can’t hurt, considering you will be presented with the trial of your lifetime at Parris Island or San Diego, where they will be looking to get under your skin every possible way until you voluntarily remove yourself. I’ve known tough guys who went in with a lovesick frame and they washed out within days. Start hardening yourself now. And harden yourself against the two guinea pigs you’re living with.

I think you’re on the right track by not just doing the grunt work of the house, but by assuming the role fully. Don’t wait to be asked to do the “man’s jobs” around the house. Simply presume that your responsibility is the physical labor: fix the gutter, rake leaves, power wash the deck. Don’t just do it before they ask, do it without your asking their permission. Embody this attitude:

The more you assume the active/physical labor of the house, the more you lay down the sexual contrast to their passive/servile labor. Stand tall. Be dominant, not domineering, easygoing but firm. Treat them as the sexual objects they are (again, sexual in the sense I employ above). Every time you look at them, your gaze should broadcast I Am The Other. Not in an overbearing way, but in an almost gentle way: I am not your sex, and you are not mine, and isn’t everything so much better that way?

Just as women find subtle ways to accent their femininity, deliberately start displaying your manliness. If you have to do this consciously until your frame takes over, so be it. Shirtless from time-to-time, loud, deep-voiced, playful strong-arming, horseplay, open stuck jars, move heavy furniture, bang nails into shit. Consciously, but not overtly/blatantly, and never creepily. Small doses and baby steps. And playing uncle to the two-year-old can melt any frozen bitchheart, so long as you do it in a deliberately manly way — don’t coo and aww and make baby talk, but tease and tickle and throw her in the air.

Don’t flip the house on its head overnight with a sudden change. The art of game is in the subtleties, and you need to gradually introduce them to a new way of looking at you until the transformation is complete, or else they will smell artifice. Start small but think big.

“I have found that a talent for empathy (non-sociopath narcissist) is crucial: once I can see the world through their eyes, I know what they yearn for and exactly how to manipulate them. But that takes experience or training or insight that may be hard to come by without a mentor and role model.”

Would you recommend me any books like this, like books explaining empathy or a understanding of it so I can start to apply it.

OK, so I’m a manjaw and I don’t claim to have “women’s intuition.” Seems whoever was responsible forgot to download that particular software to my hardware before packaging me and sending me out into the world. That said, I’ve got lots of women friends, so here’s my observation:

Under most circumstances, “women’s intuition” is a strung-together series of disjointed observations that is wrong more often than it’s right. You’d think, in any given situation, faced with a question and a number of facts that should point you to one conclusion or another, the laws of chance would dictate that you’d be right at least 50% of the time. Not so with most of the claims my friends have made about what their intuition is telling them. (Because they’re my friends, I don’t laugh at them or lay an “I told you so” on them, even if I did tell them so.)

There is one exception: When it comes to their kids, they’re almost ALWAYS right. It’s eerie. It’s really more like seeing an actual, psychic sixth sense in action than a neurological/emotional process. No joke: I’ve seen my friends who are mothers know when their child got hurt or needed help from miles away. The evolutionary advantages to this ability are pretty self-evident, although I’m damned if I know how they do it.

I have serious trouble taking an ‘intuition’ seriously that tells you you should fuck and reproduce with some psycho jailbird drug addict who threatens to kill (and sometimes does) your family just because he’s tall or looks like your favorite actor.

True dat. You can see this “intuition” (hypersensitivity to changes in equilibrium, really) in something as insignificant as text messages.

That’s why fade aways or even mildly altering your text response patterns instills dread. This is why altering your routines randomly instills dread. Anytime you throw the equilibrium off a little, from “the expected you” to ‘the unexpected you” it sets off her “intuition”. She’ll start getting this feeling something is “off” and while she won’t always come out and say it, she knows something is wrong/you’re mad/you don’t want to talk to her etc… and she’ll work to get those positive feelings/assurances/reinforcement from you again.

That’s why the gameless need to learn the little, minor tactics in Game (especially LTR game) that tweak her intuition a little if she is getting to comfortable or her behavior is becoming questionable. Haters call it try hard and fabricated, but really you’re just learning to do the things that oft-disinterested/distracted men do to their girlfriends that outsiders think is shitty but keeps her coming back everytime.

To wit, an anecdote on women’s intuition and how powerful even minor changes in mindset can be-

Years ago in a longtime LTR I had periods of time when I wavered in my desire to be in it (going so far as cheating on a couple occasions). Every time one of these periods came along, my gf knew within a couple days something “was up”. She would keep it to herself, trying to figure out whats wrong and draw me closer again, but then we would have a drunken argument and it would all come spilling out in a big mess of tears and smeared mascara. Here I was, thinking I was doing a great job hiding my doubts (my meta-behavior didn’t change at all), but she could always just sense it, likely due to a decrease in touching, eye contact, etc, that manifested from my doubts- the little micro stuff that the unintiated are blind to (hence the clueless shlub who is in love with a woman who is cheating on him wildly behind his back).

Yep. It’s like going four levels deep in Inception. It still kinda looks like life, but it’s not the life we thought we knew. And it’s scary to think that women spend a lot of time at that fourth level — they’re waaay more attuned to it than we are.

Detecting “creeps” : women are quantum levels better than men at reading faces and congruity problems. This magic skill of paying attention to people and understanding social skills is part one of intuition.

Caring for baby: women are ninnies who are generally scared of everything, so if this is right, then it’s part two of intuition. Obviously, not that intuitive to figure out that kid playing in tree will fall down.

So, online dating has yielded two results simultaneously. I felt somewhat guilty about going on a date with the second girl no less than 20 hours after the first. Now I am in somewhat of a sticky situation. Both dates went spectacularly well in their own ways.

Girl #1 was classy, sweet-natured, easy to talk to, and we were able to bond over some common interests. We had great back and forth conversation, and she has a mysterious allure of being born and raised in another country. She was more than happy following my lead through a little adventure around the neighborhood. I was content in letting my softer side show and only did some gentle teasing in the spirit of conversation. Zero shit tests. Near the end, she reached for her purse to share the bill, but was shocked to find that I had paid the tab while she was in the bathroom and thanked me again in a text today. Amazing goodnight kiss. Girlfriend material = HIGH.

Girl #2 is still in college, and it shows. Showed up late with cleavage in magnificent view, not much in the way of culture (she loves Kim Kardashian. ‘Nuff said). Did some probing and came away with the spoiled princess persona, so I re-calibrated to be an asshole (illiciting choruses of delighted “asshole!” paired with girlish giggling). However, total smokeshow, and despite having next to nothing in common, we have fantastic chemistry and were walking along in the rain bantering back and forth. She shit-tested and made demands a LOT (i.e.; “Tell me something random! I want to hear a random story!” “Alright. So I was just got some coffee with this annoyingly short girl…*punch in arm*) Girlfriend material = Low.

Game has served me well, but I am honestly trying to be more genuine with girls at this point. I had a lot of fun, but I’m a bit tired of “gaming” girls. Of course, game will never leave, but I don’t want to actively think about doing it. I am confident in my ability to maintain a propery LTR at this point (one of the reasons I know this: All beta behavior has been scrubbed from my muscle memory and I have to actively try to be nice). I am not saying I am a “master Alpha,” but I’m just a bit tired of skirt chasing and want something with more meaning. Which leads me to this problem of choosing one or the other. How long do I wait? How much do i screen? How do I react when I am confronted with the “Are you seeing anyone else?” question?

Aaaaand as if on cue, a text from a random fling from the early summer just arrived. “Hey.” It’s like they just KNOW.

“I felt somewhat guilty about going on a date with the second girl no less than 20 hours after the first…”

At the end of my time Internet dating, I went on four dates in two-and-a-half days. Two of the four women I hooked up with. One of them is now my wife.

Don’t sweat it so much. (And for the record, I never could be fake either.)

For LTR, go with whatever. For marriage, go with great chemistry (since you’ll hopefully be spending decades together in close proximity) and build that trust. I don’t know what you need, but your head seems to be in the right spot no matter what.

No matter how old, they’re still just *girls*. Play with ’em until you find a toy you like.

And we also both know that you’re confined to a wheelchair, breathing into an oxygen mask, using a knife to ritually scar your dark, dark skin… while all around you dance the ghosts of murdered prostitutes.

Surprised nobody has given you the straight-up answer, as you’re in the catbird seat. You need to date them both, at least for a bit. Allow the good girl to win you over with sex and her femininity. In her mind you’ll always be the prize she fought for victoriously. When she starts pressing for commitment (usually not until about ~1 month in), dump the college girl viciously for your own satisfaction and go all-in on the boyfriend route.

This sounds familiar. With female friends, I have to guess their feelings. It’s not a chore, as they never get mad for not guessing them. We just do it. This helps talk to friends who are upset but don’t want to burden you with their problems – you just ask on your own.

Using this with a man just doesn’t work. If he frowns for 0.5 seconds, it means nothing. If he got 1% quieter, it means nothing. There is a lot he can do that according to all evidence means nothing, yet my negative feelings detector keeps detecting.

Whenever you find yourself in a comfortable conversation with someone. Give your face a concerned aspect and say,
” So , what’s wrong ? ”
And she’ll say ” What do you mean ? ”
And you say ” C’mon, something’s up, you can tell me. ”
And she’ll say ” How did you know ? ”
Because she actually doesn’t know that something is always wrong, with everyone, all the time, and it’s usually more than one thing. And people walk around this way thinking that they’re doing such a great job of hiding it all. Pretending that they are well adjusted models of contentment.

They’ll think you’re gifted with a sixth sense or that you’re very perceptive. They’ll wonder what tell you saw , what facial expression or eye movement betrayed their inner turmoil. But it’s nothing to do with any of that , it’s just understanding human nature and being empathetic enough to ask.

Interesting topic. I think it’s probably true that lying to a woman is harder than lying to a man. And unless you divulge information that is obviously false, or the person knows the specific signs to look for, the only way someone can tell you are lying is through intuition. More girls have caught me lying without having any evidence of it than men have.

On the other hand, women often readily believe a lie to be true to save themselves emotional pain. This is why every mother of a convicted murderer believes her son is innocent. Women are far more capable of self-delusion than men are.

On a semi-related note, here is a link to a study which suggests masculine men are more trustworthy than feminine men. I think other studies on the topic have concluded the opposite: women avoid highly masculine men as long-term partners because they think they’ll does the cheatingz.

signed up for a beginner flight lesson for my first hour out of 40 for license and i guess chicks do have a 6th sense one showed up to come with me to fly in the backseat and watch first time she ever flew said i did a good job
i highly recomend it if your looking for something totaly diferent to do.

Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini explains the intuition phenomenon well. He explains that in our lives we have to make so many judgements and decisions that we could not perform them all thoughtfully, so we make shortcuts. Intuition is subconscious shortcutting. The signals you send from your posture, clothing, facial expressions, choice of words, etc. are what get evaluated, not the “real person” behind them.

She’s quite hot on this photograph (http://www.virginswanted.com.au/catarina-BID.html). But she’s so unbelievably stupid. I’m sure she’ll feel traumatized after having sex with the old dirty guy who will buy her. We have two more days to save her … It would be really funny if some super hot alpha male buys her and then doesn’t have sex with her. But of course the buyer will be some old, rich and repulsive creep. Can’t we donate $300 000 to CH and ask him to save this stupid girl’s life? Although there is a small chance that she’s very poor and she’ll fall in love with the buyer’s money and live happily ever after …

Yes, exactly! We could then have a chance to promote our ideals (that only people who are in love with each other should have sex). But the buyer needs to be super alpha (someone who can afford to be picky) not some christian beta or something like that. The alpha guy wouldn’t have sex with her (because she’s not hot enough for him), he would just game her and make her fall in love with him. At the end of the reality show (documentary or what it is… ) he can politely let her know that he’s in love with another girl (shows her a picture of a girl much prettier than her), gives her some evo psych lessons and suggest her to only have sex with someone she loves. The girl will probably insist on having sex with him but he can politely tell her that she’s just a whore and that he can get a girlfriend who’s not a prostitute. Sadly, we don’t have money for this and in two days some creepy rich guy will fuck her …

Yes, exactly! We could then have a chance to promote our ideals (that only people who are in love with each other should have sex). But the buyer needs to be super alpha (someone who can afford to be picky) not some christian beta or something like that.

Look, women are not attracted to men who don’t want to have sex with them because they “respect women” (I thought christian betas appear to be like that but maybe I don’t know them well enough). We prefer men who are more honest.

About money … I’m sure that her buyer will be some 60 year old creep (like you) who will probably want to fuck her more than once so there is a chance they will end up having a relationship. But this can only happen if he is very rich, that’s what I was saying.

OK, sorry, I quickly watched the video now. Catarina appears to be some cynical Australian girl. I always thought that she’s a poor Brazilian who wants to give money to other poor people. I confused everything I guess. Still, we should help her … Unfortunately I don’t have enough money and I doubt she is into lesbian sex😦

Marketing. The dude does not need any substitute. The grrrl, nuther story. Her facial features indicate a bit of chubbiness. I know the type.

You don’t know me. I am not 60 yet, about 2 and half years to go. My wenches, (serail of 4 at the moment, 20-to 24 yo) apparently don’t go after riches, because they can’t possibly assume that am rich–just a standard middle class issue. I have to ask them about the “creep” thing. So far none of them alluded to it.

It’s simple really. My girls told me that they don’t see their peers as “men”. That includes an age group between 20 and mid-30s. “Boys” they say. Also, I am not native to North America, so I did not have the feminazi BS shoved into my throat since tender young age and thus not rendered behaviorally impotent and inept. Inherited and acquired by osmosis my traits from my father that was at one time a fighter jet pilot and Alpha usually comes with that territory.

Commodization of virginity. here was always that aspect in one form or another. This is a one-time prostitution…. with some potential to cash on future exploits. People want to do shit–let them. They will reap consequences, intended and unintended.

Intuition/sense/etc is just a combination of your Reticular Activation System picking up stuff relevant to you (ie – a girl avoiding creepy guys, a natural sensing the horny women in a room, poker player’s tells, etc), and your brain making a ton of little calculations and comparisons to previous reference experiences at a phenomenal rate so fast that you wouldn’t be able to break it all down calculation by calculation fast enough to do anything productive with it, so your brain just summarizes it in the form of a feeling.

Women are better at this in social interactions because they train more at it, from the second they get tits, and even before that, they’re forced to learn to read people’s intentions, motives, behaviors, etc. Men, especially these days with the Internet for communication and Warcraft to replace face to face social interaction, tend not to develop much of this. It’s not that they’re incapable, they just aren’t in social situations as much, especially ones that involve sexual intent. A really hot girl gets hit on in subtle ways by practically every guy in her vicinity, even just going to the grocery store, whether it’s a blatant “hey baby” or as subtle as a cashier being extra friendly or men losing track of their conversation as she walks by or a beta male walking down an aisle at the grocery store just to look at her and hope she opens him.

But it’s a learned skill. Girls generally have a head start but if you go out and expose yourself to tons of social interactions, you’ll develop the same sense they have.

Say a decently attractive girl has around 5 interactions a day where she has to determine someone’s intentions (even if it’s the gay shitty flirting like a bus driver chatting her up, co-worker guy being extra friendly, etc.). On the weekend stack another 20 because she goes to the bar. She’s at 55 a week, 26,400 in 10 years and most of these are based around sexual intent.

If you went out 4 nights a week for a year and opened 10 sets a night, that’d be 1,920 new reference experiences in a year. Do that for 10 years and you have 19,200 reference experiences under your belt.

The average guy probably goes out what, once a month? And talks to MAYBE 1 new stranger a night if that? In 10 years that’s 120 reference experiences interacting with new strangers and learning their intentions and to read them etc.

Then when you throw in the person’s own intent, ie – for women this stuff is just in the background subconscious survival, for the average guy he’s not even remotely thinking about his interactions, and a PUA is specifically going out TO study these things and break down every interaction he has in Field Reports and work out kinks in his game and learning to read women’s sexual signals, etc., you can end up with situations where PUAs are better at “female intuition” than most girls are, which is the case for myself and most of the guys I know who have a lot of experience with women. Those women are 10 steps ahead of most guys but we’re 10 steps ahead of them…the best part is that because people view “female intuition” as some kind of magic sense only women have, they can’t even comprehend that we could be out-thinking them and that just makes it even easier. And because they can’t figure out how we keep being ahead of them, the frustration and challenge makes them attracted to us.

This is why we stress going out. You can read all the Manosphere blogs and Mystery Method and YaReally comments you want, but you will NEVER rack up a serious level of social experience if you aren’t going out regularly and purposely approaching.

“This is why some of the best players beloved by women possess feminine acumen themselves.”

I’ve noticed this but never completely understood it. I think our female ancestors were most attracted to hyper masculine men who didnt speak much and were more action oriented. The type of guy who would speak with them for a few minutes and then throw them over their shoulders and take them back to the cave. Now I notice women are selecting baby faced men who can hold a long convo and build comfort. Not that I have any problem with that, I just cant imagine our ancestors having any tolerance for speaking with a women for hours at a time or passing their passive aggressive shit tests.

When a society gets to a certain point of success, the most fun and ease to be had is NOT from building/creating on your own, but ensconcing oneself in a position to leech off society. For example, when food, health, water, space, money, leisure activities, and safety are all established, suddenly there are no more mountains to climb; now the test is getting others to maintain those mountains for you (because maintenance is not really sexy–no one gets sexy credit for keeping a building the same color its always been).

Since females are nature’s masters at manipulating others (men) to do everything for them, more feminine men would inherit some of this ability, thus, in a safe and secure society, would seem (to women) to have the best genes to go on, since they would know best the easy and fun routes to wealth and stability.

This might explain fag-doms rise: feminine men who become too feminine and adopt too many feminine qualities. And why fag-dom may be an evolutionary trait that hasn’t died out—it exists on the same genes as feminine maleness, which is an extremely positive trait in established, safe societies.

This would also explain attacks on “sissy”/foppish/faggymen throughout history: builders and betas would recognize these men as leeches, not want the blood of society drained off, and not like their (undeserved) success with women and procreation (if straight).

Heh. I must be a very atypical nigger. Blond hair, blue eyes, pale skin. And surprisingly, I am the last one who would complain about Jews. I may be puzzled by a certain segment of them that clings to leftism tooth and nail, but that about covers it.

Anyway, I were talking more in general, not specifically addressing my quip to you. I suppose I must have ruffled some feathers of yours. Probably did not even hurt–just fix ’em back in place.

Preforming death metal vocals (especially while driving): this would appear to raise my testosterone levels and puts me in a generally good mood. I heartily recommend this as a stress release exercise to anyone. To me this is more effective than deep breathing/visualization ect.

I have emailed you privately….thought you may want a bit of a summary of my take from a washed-up 40+ married woman’s perspective – so, I am a has been.

So, I married the alpha who never became a full blown alpha – great provider, adores me and much later fell for an androgynous alpha, who is a loser, who wouldn’t give me time of day. I am being judgemental about the “loser” just to simplify things, otherwise the typology gets real confusing.

So the androgynous-looking alpha gets to bang me royally me and dump me and I am stuck with the sub-alpha, but the androgynous alpha gets under my ageing, but pretty nice, skin. In fact beta female like me would have wanted nothing more but to be impregnated by androgynous alpha (or at least, given the chance to, which never happened with my sub-alpha), so I could have an exit strategy – not my personal style to deceive, but hey, I am a victim of my biology, and in terms of my clock, I’m at one minute to midnite, right?. However, aa “interrupted” that.

Meanwhile this alpha/beta hybrid from when I hear his name mentioned by my alpha female friend, is pining for her – his first alpha woman and going out and seeking alpha-replacements – with whom he has the longest relationships, or flings with beta women, either young or old (it doesn’t matter to an alpha/beta like him as they are required for life support for him).

I guess if I was an alpha woman (like my friend, who was aa’s long-time ex, then I could possibly entertain some polyandry thing, like what she had going a decade or so back before she had to make a choice and didn’t choose him), but I am a beta, I don’t get to do that, with this guy.

So, other than go to my old garage, close it , turn on my ignition and stick a pipe out my exhaust into my car, what do I do?

What a fucking cop out I’m a victim of my biology. If a man went and raped some woman and claimed that defense he’d be convicted nonetheless. You are still responsible for your actions, biology or not.

Other than that, you lost my at “alpha/beta hybrid”, can’t follow your story. What you need my dear is therapy given your suicidal tendencies, not an androgynous alpha baby. Also funny how no woman would admit to her husband or flings being “beta”.

O.K., Tartarus, once you have finished spewing your vitriolic venom, look down at your own balls and see whether you have ever lusted after someone you can’t have and whether you are caught like a deer in headlights. I never said my husband wasn’t a good guy – he is just a good guy and I then got into a situation with another guy who played the “game” as you guys put it, and this time, I fell badly.

Tartarus, wow, I wonder if it’s a bit of the pot calling the kettle black on here. So, my husband is a good guy and no dick on here has never cheated. After reading these comments, my blood pressure must have spiked about 20 points, but you know what? I don’t care for your “holier-than-thou” abuse. Get your head out of your dick and maybe have some compassion for women and maybe stand out of the grouple gang you are part of on here. FFS!

Yes, that must be it. “Pot calling the kettle black”. The only reason why anyone would throw invective at repulsive traitors is because they themselves are repulsive traitors.

Sorry, I never cheated and would never cheat. Which, incidentally, is actual abuse to a lot of decent people (particularly dumb beta schlubs) who actually care about their worthless partners even if they’re long past their expiration date. I have compassion for “women” when they deserve it. Why, exactly, should I have compassion for you? You betrayed your husband for a guy who didn’t even want you. Sounds to me like you got exactly what you deserve. I recommend you drop the shitty attitude, recognize the enormous magnitude of your fuck-up, then focus your energies on setting things right instead of shrieking at strangers on the Internet. That means confessing to your husband that you cheated, then doing what’s best for him without complaint. Show you’re more than a wild beast in heat and maybe then you’ll earn some actual respect.

Oh O.K. cadnerd, once you have finished spewing your vitriolic misogynist venom like your fellow posters, perhaps give me an intelligent response, rather than trolling for posters you can abuse~You accuse me of having no depth and I can’t see any in you, either. No, I did not reproduce.

You should be a bit more original in your replies. The “vitriolic misogynist venom” gets boring after a while. I am not a misogynist (I love women, just can’t stand certain type you represent very well). I am nearly mild-mannered once a while, easy-going guy. You don’t wanna hear what I really think!

The non-reproduction is to your credit.

Tell you what… Copy your initial post, print it out and ice it for a couple of weeks. Then read it as if it was written by someone else. If you don’t discern at least a hint of “qualities” I listed, then you are a lost cause.

BTW, there are ladies posting here that are as far from your profile as it can be and I am always looking forward to read their contributions. Stingray comes to mind, amongst others.

Seriously, what’s wrong with you? How can you say to anyone ‘hope you did not reproduce?’. It’s like saying ‘hope your kids will die in a car accident and your shitty genes won’t have the chance to reproduce further’. Imagine someone saying that to you.

Cadnerd, sorry for this ‘hope you did not reproduce’, I didn’t mean it. I hope your kids are well and will keep reproducing in the future. Still, I found it really insulting that you said that to Ella, who didn’t yet have a chance to reproduce even though she wanted to:

“In fact beta female like me would have wanted nothing more but to be impregnated by androgynous alpha (or at least, given the chance to, which never happened with my sub-alpha), so I could have an exit strategy – not my personal style to deceive, but hey, I am a victim of my biology, and in terms of my clock, I’m at one minute to midnite, right?”

@Ella, yes you are old enough to be very serious about looking for another suitable mate if you ever want to have children. I don’t understand why your husband doesn’t want to have kids? That’s very cruel of him and I can understand your situation and your decision to have an affair with somebody else.

he is just a good guy and I then got into a situation with another guy who played the “game” as you guys put it, and this time, I fell badly.
–She magically “got into a situation with another guy” and she just “fell badly.”

It’s like she did nothing on her own! It all just happened! The gun just went off, the punch just hit him, the robbery just went awry!

This reminds me of an intro english class where they talk about characters having “agency”; to the lefty-pussy world, females/niggers/the “oppressed” never have any agency; things just “happen” to them.

Wow, what a name whorefinder? What a misogynist lot of drivel. Of course I was responsible for my actions, you poor excuse for a man. It’s got nothing whatsoever to do with giving women the vote – be logical for a change and say something worthwhile or go and masturbate to porn.

go and masturbate to porn
—Can I say the orgasm “just happened”? That I just got into a situation with naked chicks on screen, my hands around my 15 inch anaconda, and the cum came out on its own? That it just “went off”? That I just “fell into” my orgasms, through no fault of my own?

I think guys should start doing this. Actually, come to think of it, its what the stereotype of the cheating man is—-“honey, I didn’t mean to raw dog that hooker/bang that high school girl/skull-fuck your sister after anally violating your mom—it just happened! I fell into it! I just found myself in the situation!”

Bollocks, Oh Master. You’ve had too much success with women and you’ve allowed yourself to become infected by their rationalization hamster.

Women are not more intuitive than men. It’s just that for women, the micro-cues matter. Women are very responsive to people’s frames of mind. That’s not intuition. That’s reading the micro-cues. Take for example, waiting in a shopping queue. If I am pre-occupied about something like “what did I forget to include on my shopping list?”, or if my mind is far away on something else altogether, the check-out chick is not going to be overly responsive. But if my mood changes and I switch into teasing mode, then it’s an entirely different ball-game. Like when I look at her directly, into her eyes or what she is doing, and I find myself subconsciously daring, “go one sweetheart, slip up on counting the items”, then she picks up on that dare, and a flirt gets underway. That’s not intuition. That’s reading the micro-cues. She notices things that most men regard as irrelevant. “Oh dear, he’s looking at me”, and then that sets the stage for other cues to play out. Men wouldn’t give a toss. Micro-cues. She can even detect HOW you are looking at her and she will infer your dare… that’s not intution, that’s micro-cues playing out. For women, it’s the trivial that matters. It’s got nothing to do with intuition. You are over-rating them.

Women pick up on body language. Is that intuition? No, it’s not. It’s reading the micro-cues and assuming them to be accurate representations of reality. It’s making assumptions about what a particular posture means. Men have a more sophisticated appreciation that not all cocky-looking postures are necessarily confident.

Give you another example. Women choose “types” of men. If your label is compelling and you can convince her that you are that type that she’s looking for, you’re in. It’s got nothing to do with true intuition, which I interpret as “big picture”. Synthesis and the big picture are the domains of men, not women. Synthesis and the big picture are the essential elements of true intution. This is not the domain of women. The domain of women is micro-cues, pigeon-holing and defining, and that is the domain of their rationalization hamster. True intuition, in the sense of big picture, is alien to women. Theirs is the domain of the small-picture and hence should not qualify as true intuition. I would rather call women’s intuition false intuition. Women’s intuition is based on jumping to conclusions, and NOT in leaving things undefined until you have a more accurate representation of the reality that you are trying to apprehend.

You nailed it. If women’s intuition was really that good we wouldn’t have tons of single mothers, women dating rapists and murderers and the like. Also, game is about emulating alpha traits, if a woman had that good intuition she would pick up on it being game and this whole thing would be pointless.

The notion of female intuition is a myth, new research suggests. They are no better than men at. forming instant judgments -even though they claim they are.

The finding comes from a study of more than 15,000 people who were asked to look at pictures of faces. Some of the subjects had genuine smiles and others were faking it – the volunteers were invited to spot the ‘real’ smile. Men fared slightly better at the test. They identified 72 per cent correctly while women were right 71 per cent of the time. When the volunteers were asked to look at faces of the opposite sex, men correctly detected 76 per cent of women’s fake smiles but women spotted only 67 per cent of men putting on a false grin. Before studying the faces, the volunteers were asked to rate how intuitive they thought they were.

[This supports the notions as shown on BBC2’s “He say’s,she says” where women think they can spot women’s social cue’s better than men.]

Almost 80 per cent of women rated themselves as highly intuitive, compared with just 58 per cent of men.

University of Hertfordshire Psychologist Prof Richard Wiseman, who led the study, said: ‘These findings question the notion that women really are more intuitive than men.

Another study that disproves women’s intuition. Why do you think so many women get duped by con men? Or even better get cheated on or unaware of being a member of a harem?

^This is what I’m saying. “Women’s intuition” is largely a myth. A skilled cold-reader has it all above just about anyone in the world, male or female. The only exception, as I’ve stated above, is a mother’s ability to know when her children need her…which, in my observation of my friends with kids (I have none myself), goes way beyond any kind of rationally explainable phenomena and approaches true psychic territory.

I agree. Ultimately a shit-test is a good sign. Her subconscious is probing you because you set something off.

The catch-all “you men just want to fuck me and dump me!” is designed to ensnare lesser men by eliciting meek responses like, “no no I just want to hang out,” “did someone hurt you?” “I’m not like them, let’s talk” etc. etc.

Poor, compassionate betas always get tripped up in this one. If they’re lucky, they’ll be dismissed. If they’re not, they’ll be groomed for LJBF and buy-me-drinks-pretty-please subservience.

You deflected as well as one could, given how immediately she went into antislut defense with this shit-test. Which, by the way, is a sign of an increasingly jaded carousel rider. It’s funny, if sad, how readily they reveal themselves.

So, her intuition is right — you “just want a pussy,” — but the best way to work against a woman’ts intuition is by not giving it any answers, like a political dodge. Rev up that hamster wheel with a lot of oblique amusement and chastisement and she’ll be doubting herself and looking for some excuse to explain her behavior — “and I had a horrible haircut” — in no time.

@walawala: When I make fun of all the Keyboard Jockeys around the Manosphere and refer to how few guys here actually go out and sarge, you’re one of the few guys I can tell is actually going out and working on his game. Props, dude, keep it up!

Good recovery, that chick is a drama shitshow. Don’t get too attached, and expect your vehicle’s tires to be slashed if you pump ‘n dump her lol Some other shit you can drop in there to support your frame if she keeps testing it or if you get her to actually go out for a drink, is to play up the picky angle. Her rant is about how guys will fuck anything with a hole so she hasn’t met a guy with standards yet. She’ll fuck you on the first date though, if you can get a date, so that’s good.

Personally, I would send her something like “I’m picky, i don’t have sex with girls I don’t have chemistry with in person. We’re going for drinks so I can make sure you’re not a psycho. Quite frankly, your weird out-of-nowhere rant about fucking holes has me questioning even going for drinks, but I know a lot is lost in translation over texting.” but I send longer text messages than most guys prefer to…so it’s probably enough for you to just keep that mentality in your head: You have standards, going for drinks isn’t for YOU to impress HER, it’s for HER to qualify to fuck YOU, and her weird bratty behavior is already turning you off.

When you text her, ask yourself “is what I’m about to send congruent to this headspace?” So if she texts you with an “okay you can take me out for drinks but I’m not sleeping with you” (her setting the frame of you trying to impress her and she holds the key to sex), you know sending “great! I know this nice restaraunt you’ll like! It’s okay we don’t have to have sex, I just want us to get to know eachother!” (you accepting her frame/terms) isn’t as congruent to it as something like “don’t worry, I’m sure I’ll be crawling out the bathroom window when I see your horrible haircut lol” is (you keeping the frame of being in charge of whether you two have sex or not, and her needing to impress you).

“These shit tests usually come out the minute they feel some tinge of attraction and don’t know what to do with it.”

Essentially, yep…but I would tweak the last part a bit to say: Shit-tests come the minute they feel some tinge of attraction, as they try to throw themselves OUT of attraction. Their subconscious knows “oh shit, we started rolling down a hill toward fuck-town, quick, hit the brakes!!” and it tests you, hoping that you’ll fail the test, and it can go “HAH, see?? That guy was a chump, attraction over! Whew, we’re safe now…”

That’s why when you pass shit-tests, the girl is even MORE attracted. Hell, some PUAs purposely goad the girl into shit-testing them either directly (saying controversial things) or indirectly (peacocking) just so they can pass the shit-tests and build attraction faster than if she didn’t test. The girl gets the same Buying Temperature spike of emotions and rush of adrenaline that she gets when she jams on the brakes and realizes they don’t work. “omg I’m so fucked, I don’t know how to stop this from happening!!”

This is also why girls will watch out for eachother and the Mother Hen will fuck shit up for you. A girl who’s Buying Temperature is through the roof isn’t thinking rationally, so her friend will see that you’re owning all the girls’ shit-tests and that she’s going to end up fucking you, so the her friend will jump in and pull her away (“we have to go to the bathroom!!”) and get her away from you so that she can calm back down.

This is a big part of why we isolate the girl from her group. It’s also why when you re-engage the girl later she may suddenly be cold or back to full bitch-mode with you, because she’s had time to regroup and come down from the emotional high and put her guard back up when you see her again.

If you’ve ever wondered why the Mother Hen usually seems to be the unpleasant downer of the group, part of it is because as the skeptical asshole downer intent on having a miserable night, she’s less likely to get sucked into being attracted to you, compared to her bubbly happy birthday-girl or bachelorette friend that she’s protecting.

You can actually see a good shot of this in action in this super old PUA clip with analysis:

He purposely pushes the routine too far for the video and spikes the girls’ BT too high, too fast, to the point where they can’t even form words, so they have to run away so they can calm down. We call this “frying her circuits” and it usually results in losing the sets so you want to be aware of when it’s about to happen so you can pull back and bring her back down a bit so she’s attracted, but not so attracted that her defenses kick in.

Fascinating glimpse into the Hamster Psyche, but there’s a lot of noise there too.

The best feature is the “Into You / Not into you / Verdict’s still out” poll at the bottom of each post. This entry best illustrates the power of Game:

His text: “So you just used me for sex and vanish ….I feel so cheap.”

Her plea to the henhouse: “Wtf?!?! This guy never responded to my calls or text. A week later I get this? I don’t know how to interpret this. Is this an attempt at being funny or does he really feels this way?”

The vote: He’s Into You: 419, He’s Not Into You: 240, Verdict still Out: 291

Quantifiable proof that Game is at its most powerful when it reaches beyond the girl directly subjected to it. Almost a thousand votes, and 75% of them are either in his favor or unsure — and uncertainty always works in the man’s favor.

Obviously the guy isn’t “into her,” he’s setting up the delayed follow-up bang because he knows she has these unanswered questions about him due to all of her ignored texts.

He gets affirmation from the community, who love his inexplicable behavior of accusing her of callous abandonment when he’s been actively ignoring her. Absolutely hilarious. They have unwittingly helped him into an easy lay and a potential fuckbuddy to string along for a while.

Her Hamster: Either he’s fooling me or I screwed up, so I’ll probably sleep with him again just to find out.

Damn i had to cry when i saw the gamers reaction to a guy having fun at a convention; why do all nerds have to be white knights and defend those poor innocent (cough!) women; its not like theyre getting any pussy…..pathological altruism at its best

wow I read their comments before seeing the video and I was expecting the video to be some totally awkward creeper weirding girls out…

Everything went better than expected. That guy was awesome. Really alpha body language and great voice tonality…he uses a lot of “breaking rapport” commanding/challenging voice tone that a lot of newbies don’t use…British people in general use a lot of this tone, where their questions sound more like statements/accusations. Over here in North America a lot of guys use? that voice tone? where your voice? goes up at the end? that dries up vaginas because it sounds approval seeking even if they’re spitting out gold.

“umm I have a boyfriend.”
“What if I killed him?”
“ummm I’d probably be grieving for quite a while…”
“Then you’d be fine?”
“uhh you never know–”
“Alright it’s a date then.”

Isn’t another explanation that women historically raised children, an young children cannot speak? Therefore, women with a more highly developed ability to intuit what her infant needs would be more likely to have her children survive and pass on the genes.

You’re giving too much credit to them wimminz. Sure, they create a bond with the offspring and rely rather than on intuition on predictability simply because they know their kids’ patterns.

It’s the children up to 2 years age. They have still unencumbered 6th sense to pick up language/syntax/grammar like sponges. Paradoxically, they also soak in inhibitors (except societies where this ability is not taboo, which is almost none these days).

No shit. Having offspring myself, now quite grown, I concur. It’s just the ability to soak in the lingo (and sometimes a few at the same time without too much of an interference) in such a short time is uncanny.

Some interesting comments on this thread. I second the points of Aurini, Opus, acid, Jack, Thursday. and FFY. The vaunted “female intuition” is just the ability to read other people’s emotions states (including minute changes)- but how that information gets interpreted is wrong as often as not, due to the factors discussed- fear, groupthink, social gamemanship, etc.

What nobody’s discussed is the evolutionary reason for this- and it seems obvious to me that it’s because of childrearing, the main task for which human females (as well as those of other primates) are adapted to. That’s a main female role in Darwin’s sexual selection- the ability to successfully repopulate the next generation (in addition to selecting the best alpha seed.) . Infants and toddlers especially (under four = within four-year feral cycle), as well as older kids, all exhibit emotional cues, vulnerabilities, lack of control, etc. to which the mother must be attuned and respond to for the child to survive and develop. Think of this effect accumulated over millennia and you get the increased size of the emotional centers of the brain mentioned by FFY, and the resultant behaviors. (Displaced maternal instinct also explains many, if not most, cliched female behaviors- love of animals and associated environmental anthropomoprhism, etc.) I’d say this effect probably has much more to due with intrinsic female emotionality than the need to attract/keep a a male mate.

“I think we should create a two tier marriage system where a deeper marriage contract kicks in once children arrive.”

We already have that two-tier marriage system. The pre-children marriage is called “cohabitation,” or if you’re not such a liberal pussy you may prefer the phrase, “living in sin.” What would be the purpose of yoking the cohabitators together by contract?

Any rate, this marriage-lite option is satisfied in the creation of “civil unions,” which have become popular compromises with the queer lobby and are not limited to faggot sodomizers.

The overriding purpose of the marriage as “contract” (i.e., the state’s interest in coupling) is to provide the next generation of citizens. In other words, without children, the union is not truly consummated and is an effective nullity so far as the state is concerned.

For a republic on the brink, this insouciance about marriage has begun deteriorating civil society on the sub-atomic level (“nuclear family”). Marriage is an arrangement in name only, homes are broken, parents are self-absorbed, citizens are not being formed, the new generations are dysfunctional, adults are literally socially retarded, and unsuspecting husbands are raped.

There is a reason why malign social indicators, whether by era or by community (e.g. the 70% black bastardy rate concomitant with a wildly disproportionate black crime rate; or if you’re not a liberal pussy try this straight shot of Irish whiskey on the topic), track very closely with the culture of cohabitation/divorce. We simply stopped treating the task of citizen formation seriously.

No, that commenter’s solution was grasping for an answer to a more fundamental problem, and his tidy little suggestion misses the issue. Marriage is a joke because it has become indistinguishable from simple cohabitation, the only difference being a messy legal process appended to the conclusion of the former (a.k.a. “divorce”). A contract that is voidable by any party for any reason is not a contract at all, it is a notion. What is the point of a pledge if violating that pledge carries no consequences (or worse, positive incentives for women to abrogate the arrangement)?

The only possible solution to this is to strengthen the contract law of marriage, as some states lamely attempted to do through “covenant marriage” — a legal band aid over a massive suppurating cultural sore. Men are only now beginning to change the culture, individual by individual, by refusing to enter the legal feminist con game of modern “marriage.”

Until the law reflects better the many more privileges and powers a man gives up through matrimony, and until the culture again supports the mastery of men over their wives and children, men will vote with their feet. The con can only last a generation or two, until the collective memory loses reference to the old privileges of the paterfamilias, and men gradually awaken to the fact that there is nothing in it for them.

Not only have we lost connection to paternal authority, fathers are openly ridiculed as buffoons for trying to keep their whore-daughters from whoring and pimp-wives from assisting in their child’s hypergamous self-debasement and family mockery. In laundry detergent commercials.

Even if they somehow “fix” marriage, what tells you that they wouldn’t break it again? Imagine you are a man who got married right before the erosion of traditional marriage and the advent of his-fault divorce. Right before your eyes, the contract you went into got changed by the government into something else entirely, with you having all the obligations and she having all the benefits.

The problem is that the value of your government recognized marriage is always based on what other people believe marriage should be like, so if there’s a majority that wants different marriages (for their own benefit) you are sinking down on the same ship.

It’s not gonna change for the better as long as enough women benefiting Marriage 2.0 are voting. It doesn’t even require a popular majority as with the two party system everything is a package deal – you can’t pick what you like from either party and actually vote on the issues.

Women’s intuition is their greatest weakness, because intuition is easily exploitable. This is what game is doing, exploiting intuition. On the other hand cold hard logic is very hard to exploit… as long as the person is being rational

Well Hugh G. Rection, I am sure you got an A+ in college/uni whatever in your basic logic course, didn’t you? I am sure you studied it in philosophy, or did you get it from learning to be a compiler? Sheez!

Like, is this blog doing anything for enhancing relationships between the sexes, or is it going to turn into some geeky online computer game in the future, so we can all get some sleep? I mean what gives on here? Groupthink against women or what?

Speaking only for myself here , I don’t need a relationship with women. I practice catch and release. I have no interest in marriage because the risk of divorce and financial rape by modern women is too high. Women, for the most part, have become toxic , self-important whores with grand senses of entitlement. They are destroying western families and culture and taking no responsibility for it. What I learn here is how to get what I want from them (sex) while investing as little as possible in return.

It’s not so much group think against women, but the realization of what women have become. So few these days are worthy of commitment that even searching for one to commit to is a self-defeating strategy.

A psychiatrist (old, male, white) once told me:
“Women have a corpus callosum that is 50% bigger than men’s.
This enables great intuitive insights – at the cost of great confusion”.
And the statement about the Corpus Callosum is objectively true.
(OTOH, men have a Corpus Cavernosum…)

I think the problem is women, as a whole, just appear like temporarily pretty, passive parasites to a logical man.

Let’s examine what women do for society:

Do you actively try to make friends with anyone besides Alphas? No, you wait until a beta offers you something for nothing. This lack of investment in initial social bonding is a huge dereliction of something essential to society, but women don’t even think of it as such at all.

Do you actively take on the hard problems, the mining, the technical research into medicines and physics that keep us out of the mud?

On the whole, no. Of course, one has to take into account you MAKE all the humans, this is obviously a vast contribution that can’t be overstated.

But modern women have managed to reduce this sacred, awesome duty into something trivial and demeaning, like dishwashing.

So you have contempt for child-bearing as a central goal, the inability/unwillingness to do the hard, dangerous jobs outside of that, and a snobbish commitment to ignoring men socially until they do something for nothing.

You don’t understand the Jew, my friend… even their own women are only slightly above the goyim on the human scale… and this is why you see the plethora of Jewesses leading the charge in the second (and most deadly) wave of feminism.

I agree that women today have trivialized things like child-bearing and motherhood, which are essential for a healthy society. But come on, are you saying that we’re supposed to actively go out and befriend/date betas in order to make things fair for those of you who aren’t alpha? Isn’t that the exact same thing as feminists demanding that men date women who aren’t 8/9/10s?

I’m all for Western women learning how to feminine again, but by that same token men need to learn how to be *men*. Just like you’re not physically attracted to woman who neglect their appearance and act like men, quite a few of us aren’t emotionally attracted to men who are beta/herb pushovers. I personally find it grating when a man lets me walk all over him – nothing turns me off faster than a man who politely wants to me sign off on all his decisions for a date, for example. There’s no chance for a decent LTR in an environment where women think they need to be men, and men think they need to be women. Both sides have work to do in order to make those connections starts growing/flourishing again.

We can either all cut each more slack than we’d prefer, or we can all move past feminism together, and learn how to be grown-ups again. Isn’t that the whole point of this blog?

I think the fair thing women could do to beta males is not hide the contempt they have for them. But that would mean being honest and confrontational, meaning it would get them waaaaaaaaaaay out of their comfort zone. And that’s why we have the manosphere.

Women definitely notice DETAILS better than men, which would probably lead people to think women have better intuition.

However, women seem to lack SENSE. Women, especially when it comes to men, make some incredibly stupid decisions. Just go down to your local frat party and try to disagree. They completely misjudge the character of guys, completely mishandle when they should give men leeway and when they should be skeptical, and just generally do not make smart decisions.

What I see as womens’ “intuition”, I see as women choosing to be more alert. Similar to your previous article about housework… women want more housework done. That is why they tend to do more. If men paid attention to the same things women do, men could become adept at the same skills.

Women have “sixth sense”, women have “detectors” or whatever that bullshit means it’s just bullshit! it’s is NOT something that women have developed after decades of dedication.. it’s a natural thing and doesn’t have to take that importance.. telling guys that women have “sixth sense” is, imho, like telling them that women have breasts, the annoying thing here is that many emasculated men take this as some sort of “power” that women have over men (when I first released it, I burst out in laughter) so they will become more and more self-conscious thinking that women have some sort of device that allow them to enter a man’s mind and pile up all of the data in it.. ehh

and please, women and men here who argue and dwell upon the “women vs men” thing. Stop it now! the best thing that you can get from it is an emasculated boy or a slutty girl,,

After going over a handful of the articles on your site, I truly appreciate your technique of blogging. I added it to my bookmark webpage list and will be checking back in the near future. Please visit my web site as well and let me know how you feel.